About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17
comment. mr. president, as the ranking member of the energy and natural resources committee, i know that bipartisan progress on energy is possible in this congress, and while it may take our committee some time to develop to consider and complete legislation within this area, we have great opportunity to take the first step forward today through the adoption of a number of energy-related amendments that i have offered. i filed three amendments that would help us seize on the historic opportunities within our reach, i hope the senate would agree to adjust the resolution before us to reflect their beneficial impact. the first amendment that i have introduced is cosponsored by the senator from missouri, mr. blunt. it would raise an estimated $3.1 billion, and we're raising this not through taxes but by facilitating new energy production on federal lands and waters that are currently not open to development. now, it's worth noting that the $3.1 billion estimate is probably far too low. almost certainly that number does not account for the substantial receipts that would result from a go
. economists recognize the distortion of energy markets that overlook the true cost of carbon pollution, and government accountants now list climate change as a threat to our fiscal stability. now, today, as we enter the passover and easter season and as catholics the world over celebrate the selection of a new pope, we turn to voices of faith. they, too, call upon us. they call upon us to heed the moral imperatives of protecting creation and seeking justice for all people. they call upon us to reflect on our faith, on our relationship to our world and each other and on our responsibility to future generations. and they call upon us as president obama reminded us in his inaugural address to preserve our planet commanded to our care by god. i lay no claim to religious authority, but i must believe this -- something that harms others, something that disturbs god's creation, something that stands on lies and greed, protecting that must not be consistent with god's will. in his 2010 world day of peace message entitled "if you want to cultivate peace, protect creation," pope benedict xvi cal
raising taxes. when we adopt a strategy of caring about people, then we will legalize american energy production. then we will get gas $2 a gallon. then we will make sure that your sister has her second amendment rights to keep herself safe from an assailant. and we will make sure that we are innovating and growing our way into the new cures, because we have uniquely american lifeblood as her signature. and what that is, is doing right by the next generation. we all benefited by these medical and innovative technology breakthroughs. they were gifts to us to our generation. and i say to you now that it's our duty to pay it forward for the next generation. it's our duty to grow the scientific progress and innovation that we desperately need. it's our gift and our legacy to the next generation. we do it because we love. we do it because we care. this is who we are. this is our movement. the movement of love. the movement of care. we do this because we love each other. and because we love our nation. die bless you, and god bless the united states of america -- god bless you and god bless
and economic priorities like our schools and our roads and bridges and our clean energy and manufacturing industries. mr. president, this budget puts jobs first and our economy first and foremost, but it also builds on the work we've done over the last two years to tackle our deficit and debt responsibly. you know, in 2010, president obama established the national commission on fiscal responsibility and reform commonly referred to as simpson-bowles. that bipartisan group came back with a report recommending approximately $4 trillion in deficit reduction over ten years from a balanced combination of spending cuts and new revenue. the report pointed out that this level of the deficit reduction is more than any effort in our nation's history. other bipartisan groups including domenici-rivlin and the senate's gang of six as well as economists across the spectrum agreed that $4 trillion over ten years was a reasonable and responsible goal. now, since that time, congress and the administration have worked together to reduce the deficit by $2.4 trillion, $1.8 trillion coming from spending cuts,
energy cost grants programs that go to subsidize electricity bills in two states -- alaska and hawaii. alaska and hawaii. $5 million -- $5.9 million for the usda's economic impact initiative grants. now, the economic impact initiative grants have become slush funds for local governments to do such things as rehab an exercise room, renovate a museum on the pacific island of palau, and buy kitchen equipment for city government offices. now i'd like to talk a bit about defense spending. and this is probably the most painful part of my comments. and i will explain why later on. defense spending includes over $6 billion, $6 billion in unrequested or unauthorized funding for programs for the department of defense. at a time when the department of defense is facing the impact of sequestration on top of the $487 billion in cuts directed by the president, we can't afford to spend a single taxpayer dollar on programs that are not a priority for the defense department and our national security. the following things are beginning to happen now that the department of defense is under sequestration
and the cost of doing business is energy. creating a low carbon economy is done by create jobs rather than -- was a major step forward for new nuclear. today with help of we are also announcing our intelligence to take two projects to the next stage of development will support the manufacture of mission vessels in britain with new takes incentive and the honorable members has urged do you passionately and in a nonpartisan way about the damage of doing the famous ceramic industry and persuaded me we will exempt from next year the industrial processes for the industry and others from the climate change. [cheering and applause] [laughter] >> for the we will this year sign contracts for the commissioning relief, the expectations of which is already increasing investment. i want britain to tap to new sources of local energy like shale gas. i'm introducing a tax -- including a shale gas field allowance to promote early investment. shale gas is part of the future and we'll make it happen. we can help companies grow and succeed by wilding infrastructure, backing the local, and supporting successfu
around iran immediately; impede the access of the world to energy by causing incidents in the gulf which our navy can overcome, but our navy cannot prevent insurance companies from tripling, quadrupling the cost of acquiring energy. so there's an enormously negative impact on global economy immediately, particularly in asia for which neither the japanese, nor the chinese will be particularly grateful to us. but also push the europeans much more into the hands of the russians. and then every adjoining area next to iran is susceptible to local war which used to be called in the communist lexicon people's war. i once had a meeting with xiaoping in which he informed us that he's going to invade vietnam, and he wanted us to be sort of passively friendly expecting soviet reactions. he was asked what is the likely soviet reaction by the president of the united states. and he sort of breezily said, well, you know, they may do this, they may do that, they may send arms, that will take a long time because we're not going to be doing it for a long time, they may stage border incidents, we have add
had spent a lot of time and a lot of energy and everett making sure -- effort making sure that scott walker and ron johnson won that primary. but that was our decision. and i wouldn't have appreciated the national party coming in and telling the state of wisconsin, now, wait a minute, i don't know about scott walker, i think we're going to go with mark newman. well, that's ridiculous. and that's the point. it's not that we want to handcuff ourselves, it just isn't practical, and i don't think it's right. >> governors have gone on to become some of the most significant republican presidents in the last century, nixon, reagan, bush. is the party doing enough to support the rising star governors once they get past that state endorsement process? >> well, i mean, that's the plan for 2013 and 2014. um, i know that state parties sure do a lot of work and, obviously, the rga does. you know, we have a different party too. i mean, you know, i don't know, 15, 20 years ago maybe more there budget an nrcc, there wasn't 10, 20 different super pacs and 527s. we have a big group of organizations th
die because the electronics would be saturated by the energy released from the nuclear explosion. a high altitude explosion could have catastrophic effect on many satellites we rely on for weather, early warning, gps and other functions. >> dr. lu, what would that do to the astronauts on the space station? >> clearly wouldn't be good. i had the experience of being told to take shelter on board the international space station because of a large solar flare. that lasted in 2003 and happened a few times since. these levels of radiation could be much higher. >> senator cruz? staff? mr. dalbello, your company has over 50 satellites in orbit? >> right. 50 that we own. and we fly 70 some because we also fly satellites for other operators. >> how do you build the risk of these satellites into your business model. >> well, we have always planning for a fleet of that size you're always doing several things. first of all you're always building new satellites. you're always planning the launch of those satellites. this is well beyond the topic of discussion today, but launch is still a probl
that invest in energy security, and that's subject to sequestration because it's an appropriation bill, but we have provisions in the tax code that gives special breaks to the oil and gas industry. these are expenditures. these are revenues that we're hemorrhaging. they should be at least under the same scrutiny as the appropriation bills. and what the budget is saying is that we can get some savings from these tax expenditures, and which we use that for is to get our debt under control. and senator murray, you're absolutely right. one of the huge differences between the democrats and republicans is that the republicans want to reduce the tax breaks for middle-class families to give bigger tax breaks for high-income families. we say we can make the tax code more efficient and have a budget that allows for the growth of the middle class and to manage our debt in a more -- better way. bottom line, this budget produces $4.25 trillion over the ten-year window compared to simpson-bowles which was $4 trillion. it's even more deficit reduction than the simpson-bowles proposal. it puts us on a sustain
's so much negative energy for opponents of the aca. when it's attack of the benefits. not everybody knows it's a good thing. we want people to sign up right away. talking to community-based organizations is one of federal resources, but they will not be a perfect plane handed to you on a silver platter. don't wait. you need to do what you can come to seek out resources, but don't wait until it comes to you. you need to go do it. [inaudible] >> one of the things were trying to do is pass a lot of the information being put up hhs but at the fingertips because it's been well articulated that the cbo has a traditional role in helping people they serve good access to expanded programs and we need to put tools at their fingertips. the council sees itself in a transitional role for the federal government and people at the local level. in addition to that, the court may every year they bring in about 2500 to 3000 health care providers and the rest of the meeting that will occur less than 30 days to present programs begin enrollment to get all the folks in the aca. so you could leave new orl
program or there are abuses in other programs out there, that we are wasting money on energy loans by the billions, solyndras and a-123's and those kinds of companies, they're saying all of that, but we can't save any money. there's no money to be saved. you just send us more money. and then we will pass it around, and this will stimulate the economy. so i'll conclude, i see we've got some colleagues that are here. i'll just say this: the debt that we have today, i have become absolutely convinced is too high. the gross debt of the united states is 104% of our economy. it's above our g.d.p., which is almost $17 trillion -- that debt is almost $17 trillion now. what we've seen from the rogoff and reinhart study and from recent reports by the international monetary fund, report by the european central bank, report by the bank for international settlements, all say when debt is as high as we are today in the united states, that begins to pull down growth. so my colleagues claim that they have a budget, they have a budget that will help create jobs. i would say, with all respect, we ha
applaud her foresight for including investments in early childhood education, clean energy, national security, our veterans, and our seniors. and it preserves access to health care, opportunities for higher education and programs like snap and w.i.c. these supports are vital to keeping our economy moving in the right direction. her plan will help improve american competitiveness, foster innovation and open up more opportunities for small businesses to succeed. it lays out a blueprint for responsibly paying for these investments and reducing our deficit in a balanced way. each and every one of these priorities helps to improve the economic security of men, women and children, our families and our country. so i hope my colleagues will join me in supporting a plan, the murray plan that provides the foundation for growth instead of a plan that takes a meat ax approach to economic security of millions of families in our country. i yield the floor. mrs. murray: i want to thank the senator from hawaii for joining a number of very strong democratic women to talk about the importance of our b
. blunt: that's fine. mr. president, this amendment would protect consumers from energy price spikes and workers from significant job loss by providing a point of order against a carbon tax or a fee on carbon emissions. energy intensive jobs are the first to go when your utility prices get uncompetitive. your ability to compete in the world marketplace, the price of american made goods, what families pay at the pump, what they pay for heating and cooli cooling, what they pay for every american product they make would be impacted by a carbon tax or fee. and i urge the support of this amendment. mrs. murray: mr. president if. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: i yield one minute to the senator from rhode island. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: mr. president, except for perhaps in congress and in the boardrooms of exxonmobil, it is no longer credible to deny what carbon pollution -- the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. mr. whitehouse: -- it is no longer credible to ignore what carbon pollution is doing
to clean energy. let's clean up our act. let's save our children. save our grandparents. we're not talking about a remote possibility sometime in the near future. climate disruption is here. it's happening before our eyes. more american children are getting asthma and allergies. more seniors are suffering from heat strokes. let me tell you about what's happening in new york right now. we're seeing indications that extreme weather events like superstorm sandy are linked to health problems. do you know they've already given a name to a cough that has developed in that part of the country, locally known as the rockaway cough because it's in rockaway. the rockaways peninsula on long island, new york, was devastated by sandy. lives were lost. homes and businesses were destroyed. and now local residents are experiencing health problems from the flooding. coughing, it's a common symptom that health officials said could come from mold or the haze of dust and sand kicked up by the storm and demolition. if you listened to governor cuomo, what he said was these so-called 100-year storms are seen all
to produce very expensive fuel, shouldn't it at least happen through the the department of energy or some other environmental research-oriented institution? mr. inhofe: would the senator yield? mr. toomey: i would be happy to yield to the senator from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: we went through this on the armed services committee. is the senator aware that in one purchase, the administration forced the navy to buy 450,000 gallons of fuel at $29 a gallon -- you could buy it on the open market for $3. and secondly, i think you do know this because i heard you mention the department of energy -- when we formed the department of energy, they're supposed to do all this. but i would have to make one observation. as we have a president, an administration who's been cutting dramatically, and we're all concerned about what's happening to our military, our ability to defend ourselves, they do it in three quais ways. number one, they cut, number two, they delay. and number three, this is what we're getting to now -- they take the agenda -- his green agenda and put it not where it should be but under the
is doing. nobody knows what somebody over here in the mickey leland energy fellowship funding is doing compared with the new area rural competitive technology grants program. here's the other thing we found as we have gone through all these programs is that we have people who apply for a grant, people who apply for a grant and get it from one of these programs, turn around and go over and apply for the same grant from another program. so it is easy to see when you can continue to see multiple programs. even to get efficient in our federal fleet we have five different programs, 20 different agencies just to try to put fuel efficiency in the federal government. we started out with electronic health records systems for veterans and military, we have ten different programs within that. not one program. not two. but ten. just one other. here's green buildings. we listed that. multitude of agencies, multitude of programs. every department in the federal government has a green building initiative separate and apart from a central area where it ought to be, probably associated with the nationa
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17